Media
Role of journalists
If what this government letter says represents policy, Singapore's future is bleak. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Jul 3, 2006

Singapore's survival depends on the collective wisdom and superior logic of its entire people - and that must include its controlled newspapers and journalists.

Its future depends on everyone's contribution.

I have just read a letter issued by Ms. K. Bhavani, Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, which concludes that: "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government" I find it disturbing enough to comment.

If this is indeed not government policy in 21st Century Singapore and just an unintended bureaucratic observation, I hope it will be corrected.

Ms. Bhavani's letter was commenting on an article by well-liked Singaporean blogger, Mr. Brown "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30)"

I do not wish to comment on the merits or demerits of either side; readers will probably form their own opinions. But when the Press Secretary said:

(1) "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues.." This cannot be further from the truth.

They have thankfully been championing the fight against a whole range of society's ills such as drugs, alcoholism, crime, HIV-AIDS, etc, etc and I hope they will continue to do so.

If you take this role away, the media might as well close. What Ms. Bhavani probably means is 'political' or closer still "opposition" issues. If so, she should say so.

(2) "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to ... campaign for or against the Government." How many times have The Straits Times or Channel News Asia or any of the mainstream media been publicly or privately blamed for 'campaigning FOR the government.? Not in a million moons! So why say it.- By Seah Chiang Nee

Letter from K BHAVANI (in full)
Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
Jul 2, 2006.

"Your mr brown column, "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30) poured sarcasm on many issues, including the recent General Household Survey, price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares, our IT plans, the Progress Package and means testing for special school fees.

The results of the General Household Survey were only available after the General Election. But similar data from the Household Expenditure Survey had been published last year before the election.

There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes.

mr brown must also know that price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares are the inevitable result of higher oil prices.

These were precisely the reasons for the Progress Package - to help
lower income Singaporeans cope with higher costs of living.

Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them.

As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child. However, with means testing, we can devote more resources to families who need more help.

mr brown's views on all these issues distort the truth. They are
polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with.

mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely
circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet
higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer
constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly.

It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to
champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. If a
columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while
exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics."
Littlespeck.com